Re: 2015 Attendance Thread : Tue Mar 17, 2015 9:43 am  

FearTheVee wrote:

That's clearly not true. The structure DOES define the importance of games.

It previously made it more important to finish 8th than 9th, it now makes it more important to finish 4th than 5th.

Leeds finished 6th last year - if they do the same again this year, try telling their fans that the games they lost weren't important as they're watching the play-offs on TV.

After we came back to win at Wakey, then won with a weakened team at Widnes, I thought "we'll look back on those wins as massive later this year".

Would I have thought the same under last year's system? Probably not.

Similarly, I saw our recent game over Huddersfield as much bigger this year. If Leeds have ideals on the top four (and I'm pretty sure they do), then Huddersfield represents one of the biggest risks to that ambition. Beating them might only be two points on the table, but it's much more important when there are fewer 'prime' places up for grabs.

Any new structure would take time to bed in and create the level of 'drama' that we need, but that's true of all sports. Even in the Premier League, you don't start hearing phrases like "must win relegation six-pointer" until well into the new year. I think the new structure has some positive signs, but it might be a year or even two before we start to see the full effects.

The proof of this new system, for me, will come in the middle eights. I've no concerns with the play-offs - that will establish itself very quickly, but the relegation / promotion aspect will make or break this structure. If we have a situation where the Championship clubs can compete and one or two come up every season, then the system will create enough jeopardy to succeed. If we have a situation year-on-year where the bottom four in SL just come straight back up, then we will have achieved very little.

Re: 2015 Attendance Thread : Tue Mar 17, 2015 10:36 am  

FearTheVee wrote:

That's clearly not true. The structure DOES define the importance of games.

It previously made it more important to finish 8th than 9th, it now makes it more important to finish 4th than 5th.

Leeds finished 6th last year - if they do the same again this year, try telling their fans that the games they lost weren't important as they're watching the play-offs on TV.

After we came back to win at Wakey, then won with a weakened team at Widnes, I thought "we'll look back on those wins as massive later this year".

Would I have thought the same under last year's system? Probably not.

Except it is true because what you might gain from having a battle between 8th and 9th you lose in dead rubbers from 10th and 11th and 12th.

If Leeds finish 6th then whilst the games were important in the context of qualifying for the top 4. Once you can't finish top 4 there is no importance in those games whatsoever. They are meaningless.

If one game 'means everything' then the other games 'mean nothing'.

Re: 2015 Attendance Thread : Tue Mar 17, 2015 10:40 am  

SmokeyTA wrote:

If one game 'means everything' then the other games 'mean nothing'.

So the structure doesn't influence the importance of a game, except when it does.

Gotcha.

Re: 2015 Attendance Thread : Tue Mar 17, 2015 10:51 am  

SmokeyTA wrote:

If Leeds finish 6th then whilst the games were important in the context of qualifying for the top 4. Once you can't finish top 4 there is no importance in those games whatsoever. They are meaningless.

That's the benefit of hindsight though. In the context of the game at that time, then it is more meaningful than the previous structure - i.e. it could influence finishing in the top 4 rather than top 8, or possibly bottom 4

I think you need to accept you're lost this one

Re: 2015 Attendance Thread : Tue Mar 17, 2015 11:02 am  

FearTheVee wrote:

So the structure doesn't influence the importance of a game, except when it does.

Gotcha.

I never said the structure doesn't influence the importance of a game. I said you cant shoehorn importance on to a game

Re: 2015 Attendance Thread : Tue Mar 17, 2015 11:10 am  

GansonTheClown wrote:

That's the benefit of hindsight though. In the context of the game at that time, then it is more meaningful than the previous structure - i.e. it could influence finishing in the top 4 rather than top 8, or possibly bottom 4

I think you need to accept you're lost this one

i think you slightly misunderstood what i meant snd i think your hindsight would apply far more to the 'positive' aspects than negative. I don't think people will be sat here thinking ' oh I need to go see leeds v Hudds in round 3 because it may have an effect whether or not Leeds qualify for the top 4 in 27 weeks' I do think people are far more likely to say 'oh leeds aren't going to qualify for the top 4, I'll probably skip this game'.

I'm not saying that if you don't qualify for the 4 the games that have already gone become meaningless (they do but as you say only in hindsight) I'm saying the games to come become meaningless.

Re: 2015 Attendance Thread : Tue Mar 17, 2015 1:16 pm  

The new structure will have little impact at this stage on attendances, because at this stage the structure has not really changed.
It's still home and away with a magic weekend.

We have to be careful when looking at total attendances for the rounds from last year against the total attendances for the rounds for this year.
Last year there were 2 more teams in the league. It should be the average attendance for the round that is the guiding principle as they will negate the loss of Bradford and London.

If the average attendances don't increase this year on the back of London not being in the league, that is where the cause for concern is, but the total attendance for a round of games is a red herring.

I think there is a lot of work left to be done. For example people are talking that the Hull match will be down on last year, but apart from when Leeds took Hull apart in the second half 2 weeks ago, their games have been pretty close run affairs. I would only have taken 1 try to tip the balance in some of those games.

The second half show against Leeds at your own ground is a PR nightmare, but it's far from season over. There will be teams taking points off each other, keeping this league a close run thing.

Re: 2015 Attendance Thread : Tue Mar 17, 2015 2:03 pm  

Taking the average has the opposite problem. The SL average was higher than both London and Bradford so they brought that average down.

So whilst a total won't give an accurate comparison because there is 1 less game this year compared to last, an average won't either because there are two fewer poor attendances dragging the average down.

If all attendances stayed exactly the same with no change at all anywhere, we would get a lower total but a higher average. Neither are good. The best option is to remove Bradford and London from both years.

Re: 2015 Attendance Thread : Tue Mar 17, 2015 8:03 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

Taking the average has the opposite problem. The SL average was higher than both London and Bradford so they brought that average down.

So whilst a total won't give an accurate comparison because there is 1 less game this year compared to last, an average won't either because there are two fewer poor attendances dragging the average down.

If all attendances stayed exactly the same with no change at all anywhere, we would get a lower total but a higher average. Neither are good. The best option is to remove Bradford and London from both years.

Fair enough, my point was that if the average remained constant, then with the loss of london this year you could read from that, that the attendances had not improved.

Re: 2015 Attendance Thread : Fri Mar 20, 2015 10:36 pm  

couple of decent attendances tonight

castleford v salford 6901
hull fc v catalans 11994
leeds v wigan 18350

last night

saints v warrington 12618 (this one a bit disappointing really given that saints are top and warrington doing well)